Prognostic Value of Brain Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Neonatal Hypoxic-Ischemic Encephalopathy: A Meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To quantify the prognostic value of neonatal brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in neonatal hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy. METHODS: Meta-analysis of studies with ≥35-week neonates with hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy who underwent brain MRI within age 4 weeks and had neurodevelopmental follow-up for at least 12 months. RESULTS: An abnormal neonatal brain MRI was more frequent among patients with unfavorable neurodevelopmental outcome: odds ratio = 18.2 (95% confidence interval: 9.4-34.9), P <.0001. The prognostic value of neonatal brain MRI in moderate hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy had an odds ratio of 17.7 (95% confidence interval: 5.3-59.3) and in severe hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy, the odds ratio was 125.0 (95% confidence interval: 2.0-7917.1). Therapeutic hypothermia did not change the prognostic value of neonatal brain MRI (odds ratio for hypothermia, 14.0 [95% confidence interval: 3.1-63.6], vs no hypothermia, 18.1 [95% confidence interval: 10.0-33.1], P = .7525). CONCLUSION: Neonatal brain MRI provides prognostic information on outcome beyond early infancy in hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy and therapeutic hypothermia does not change its prognostic value.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.021 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".